Monday 5 November 2007 11.30 EST
First published on Monday 5 November 2007 11.30 EST

Politics is the new soap opera, well at least for 5% of the population. The Nick Clegg/Chris Huhne contest is not quite exciting enough to attract large numbers but the Respect saga, at least for those of us on the left, is like Coronation Street back in the glory days of Ena Sharples and Pat Phoenix. George Galloway has supposedly locked Lindsey German and her dashing beau John Rees out of the party office and is launching Respect Renewed.

How can the Green party compete? After all, commentators argue, we need to take viewers from Respect and the Lib Dems. Well we have the "shall we elected a leader?" debate, the ballot papers will be hitting the doormats of our 7,500 members over the next few days and yes it is causing the nearest thing to an argument you get in our rather consensual political organisation (more rows, more publicity, more media attention = electoral success? I think not). Mayoral candidate Sian Berry, GLA member Darren Johnson and the two MEPs Caroline Lucas and Jean Lambert want a "leader" and they are squaring up to party Lord Tim Beaumont, Britain's best known and busiest Green party member Peter Tatchell, Jenny Jones, former deputy Mayor of London and Dr Wall on the no side.

The leader and a deputy or co-leaders, depending on who stands for what under either title (confusing isn't it?), would replace the two current party speakers. The speaker role is straightforward: you just go on TV, on the radio, on the web and in person at meetings, demos and debates and speak for the Green party. As speaker I don't tell the party what to do; the members debate policies and the speakers put them across. Principal speaker - the title on the tin describes the contents. Green party assembly member Darren Johnson's loud declarations that he found it difficult to explain the title speaker, made it easier for me to get re-elected as speaker for a second term when he stood against me a month ago!

I find the title "leader" embarrassing: it is so patronising, assuming a bunch of people have to be "led", the shepherd label that assumes the members are sheep. However, the description of the Green party as "leaderless" by Darren Johnson is wrong. As he knows there is a party executive that takes decisions with elected members: I think the old party council was a bit better, but we have a body that is democratic and makes decisions. The likes of Darren Johnson can certainly have an input in the process, but a single leader is different from creative collective democratic "leadership".

Ken Livingstone rather cheekily suggested to me last week that Hugo Chávez would hardly be called "principal speaker" and yes I am a bit of a Chávista. However, reliance on one individual is risky. We all know that Hugo will be judged on his ability to redistribute power rather than to accumulate it to the centre. The leader is human; human beings are imperfect. The big personalities in politics can deliver both success and failure, as we have seen with Tommy Sheridan in the Scottish Socialist party, with Galloway in Respect and Charles Kennedy in the Liberal Democrats. Every time there is a leadership election for the Lib Dems, the Green party gains members. Let's keep the traffic flowing in the right direction rather than having high profile and divisive contests for a figure built up and then knocked down by the media.

Disobedience not "followership" is a Green virtue. This is a point well made by radicals in other parties. Donnachadh McCarthy, environmental journalist and former deputy chair of the Lib Dems has argued:

"Over 600,000 people have died in Iraq because the Labour party has a unified leadership system that allowed their leader, almost single-handedly to drag the UK into an illegal war. My experience as Deputy Chair of the Liberal Democrats was that a single leadership allows big business to bypass the democratic structures of the party, thus no matter who we vote for, they are always in power. The Greens alone currently have a leadership system that prevents this. It is crucial they retain it for the sake of the wider body politic."

Leaders provide an easy target for manipulation by the corporations and often manipulate members to make their parties less radical, evoking short-term electoral gain. Votes for principles ultimately are a gamble that sacrifices both ethics and success.

At the end of the day voters are increasingly critical of conventional political parties. Power sadly can corrupt. You can have personalities in politics to put forward ideas, which is why the Green party has speakers; but if you give them grand titles, things may slide. The phrase "trust me I am politician" is not very persuasive. Greens are not immune to politics-as-usual with its top-down features and heavy-handed control. In Germany, with support for Nato and in Ireland with a coalition with the far-from-fragrant centre right party Fianna Fáil (who support CIA rendition from Shannon airport and a motorway through Tara), Green parties have made mistakes.

The leader motion would propel us in this direction of business-as-usual politics. Power is like Gollum's ring, you have to treat it with care or it will turn you, be you a sweet-natured fur-footed hobbit or a gentle Green, into a potential monster. A leader for the Green party will deliver failure, not success. The people who are most passionate about the concept of a leader are those who want to be numero uno. The Fuhrer principle has no part in Green politics. George Monbiot sums up the campaign for participatory politics with clarity.

"I think much of the Green Party's refreshing distinctiveness rests on the absence of a single leader. It's one of the only parties which really looks like a party, rather than simply an apparatus of power designed to sustain those at the top. It's essential that we have alternatives to the increasingly monarchical style of Blair, Bush and the other G8 leaders and to the appalling whipping system which dominates almost all forms of party politics in Britain, crushing dissent, free speech and genuine representation. Partly because of the absence of a single charismatic leader, the party has the potential to remain much closer to the voters. How this plays in terms of realpolitik is another matter, but I believe the Green Party is respected for its integrity and idealism, and is trusted as a genuine alternative to the others."

I think George is incorrect on the realpolitik but right on the rest, this why I am urging Green party members to vote no in the referendum. Temperatures are rising and the Green party cannot afford to get it wrong.